This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 20 | Archive 21 | Archive 22 | Archive 23 | Archive 24 | Archive 25 | → | Archive 30 |
Here's Bendersky, Joseph W. (2007). A History of Nazi Germany: 1919-1945 (3rd, illustrated ed.). Rowman & Littlefield. p. 40. ISBN 0742553639.:
"...their [Nazi] version of socialism did not offer the sweeping economic and social revolution advocated by the Marxists. National Socialism would eliminate neither private property nor class distinctions. It would provide economic security and social welfare programs for the workers; employment, a just wage, and protection from capitalistic exploitation would be guaranteed. But economic equality and and a classless society were never Nazi goals. What workers would receive, aside from economic justice, would be enhanced social status. The new image of the worker would be one of honor and pride in his station in life. Workers would no longer constitute an alienated and despised group. They would again take their rightful place in society; their importance and dignity would be recognized by the rest of the nation. In the ideal Nazi Volksgemeinschaft, classes would exist (based upon talent, property, profession, etc.), but there would be no class conflict. Different economic and social classes would live together harmoniously and work for the common good. A national consciousness would replace the class consciousness that had historically divided Germans and turned them against one another.
Although socialism and anticapitalism were significant parts of the Nazi ideology, compromises were made on these aspects before and after the Nazis seized power. Ultimately, many of the socialistic ideals and programs remained unrealized. Part of the reason for this was that within the party there was violent disagreement over the essence of national socialism. Hitler, himself, was more concerned with the racial, nationalistic, and foreign policy goals of the ideology than he was with socialism. While he glorified the workers in his speeches, he later downplayed socialism in his efforts to gain votes from the middle classes and funds from wealthy capitalists. However, the left wing of the Nazi party, lead by Georg and Otto Strasser, considered Nazism essentially a socialistic and anticapitalistic movement. Their goal was the destruction of capitalism and the establishment of a socialist state, and they vigorously protested Hitler's compromises. In most cases, Hitler's views prevailed, but the conflict between these party factions over such issues would last until the suppression of the left wing in 1934. In theory, at least, socialism and anticapitalism remained integral parts of the Nazi ideology, and they continued to play a very important role in Nazi propaganda and election campaigns."
To cite another example, Nyomarkay, Joseph (1967). Charisma and Factionalism in the Nazi Party. U of Minnesota Press. p. 91.:
...no one spoke in stronger socialistic terms in this period than Hitler's protege, Goebbels, who attempted to conquer the proletarian districts of Berlin with his National Socialist message. The socialistic orientation of the party [the NSDAP] from 1925 to 1928 was reflected not only in its propaganda but also in its membership. (...) This decidedly socialistic orientation was, for a variety of mutually reinforcing reasons, reversed by Hitler in 1929.
I don't believe we've covered the shift in Nazi rhetoric towards the right in the years leading up to and including their assumption of power. And I believe the lead should mention that the ideology incorporates "socialistic elements". -- Director ( talk) 12:24, 16 November 2013 (UTC)
According to everything I have studied about Germany and Russia prior to WW2, their political philosophies were almost identical. Both were deeply entrenched in Socialist theory with different approaches to implement it. Germany leaned toward nationalizing all private business allowing owners to keep their business but all major decisions were made by the central government. Russia moved toward taking over the business sector entirely. How does this article and it author or authors equate that with "right / conservative" ideology? What does this mean to citizens of the U.S. and the nationalizing of healthcare? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mreven ( talk • contribs) 02:48, 23 November 2013 (UTC)
Actually, from what I've studied it makes very little sense to put Nazism on the far right. Their economic policy (years before the war, I might add) was much more aligned with the Soviet economic policy as opposed to the west's, minus the equality aspects of course. Chris Mann and Matthew Hughes have pointed out that by 1936 the central government in Berlin could tell big business what it had to produce and it what quantities - with profits, production levels and future plant construction all set centrally. Hardly right wing! I don't think there's any point labeling Nazism as far left (even if it might look it) since most mainstream sources will contradict it, but equating Nazi economic policy with capitalism instead of central planning is just plain laughable. Fartnut ( talk) 12:08, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
This edit reintroduces phrasing I had only just copyedited. Putting awful English back in such as "To increase its appeal to the larger segments of the population" and "a unification of all Germans united in a Greater Germany" is not beneficial to the article. As for the order of the name change and Hitler's becoming leader of the party and more or less taking it over, there may be a point there, but I am not sure there are exact dates for either of those – the original wording simply said both had happened "by the early 1920s", without saying which came first, which seems detailed enough for the lead and certainly not inaccurate. I'm not sure there was a problem that needed fixing there, even if it could be done in better English. N-HH talk/ edits 19:15, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
The DAP was changed to the NSDAP before Hitler assumed leadership or party chairman of the party so it should be said before the mention of Hitler becoming the leader. Also, a (DAP) beside the German Workers Party would also be beneficial.-- Windows66 ( talk) 19:26, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
I acknowledge the edit regarding unification of Germans/Germany, but the point still remains that the name was changed before Hitler became the leader of it, the current version is giving readers the impression that it was changed after he became the leader which was not the case. A simple putting the change name before Hitler's leadership would be beneficial.-- Windows66 ( talk) 15:22, 2 December 2013 (UTC)
What evidence is there that he initially disproved of the name change? Everywhere I have read states he wanted the name changed and approved of it greatly.-- Windows66 ( talk) 09:53, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
Nazism, or National Socialism in full (German: Nationalsozialismus), is the ideology and practice associated with the 20th-century German Nazi Party and state as well as other related far-right groups.
Linking NAZI to the far-right is historically and intellectually dishonest. I can understand the modern conventions trying to make such links but I expect more from this site. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.24.32.227 ( talk) 15:39, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
Seems this whole section has be subverted to the anti-socialist agenda to tie it to Nazism. When in fact Nazi Germany was never simple either or system.
LynnMcA ( talk) 10:13, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
"By the early 1920s, Adolf Hitler had become its leader and assumed control of the organisation, now renamed the National Socialist German Workers’ Party in a bid to broaden its appeal." - Adolf Hitler is linked there.-- Windows66 ( talk) 12:25, 7 January 2014 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 20 | Archive 21 | Archive 22 | Archive 23 | Archive 24 | Archive 25 | → | Archive 30 |
Here's Bendersky, Joseph W. (2007). A History of Nazi Germany: 1919-1945 (3rd, illustrated ed.). Rowman & Littlefield. p. 40. ISBN 0742553639.:
"...their [Nazi] version of socialism did not offer the sweeping economic and social revolution advocated by the Marxists. National Socialism would eliminate neither private property nor class distinctions. It would provide economic security and social welfare programs for the workers; employment, a just wage, and protection from capitalistic exploitation would be guaranteed. But economic equality and and a classless society were never Nazi goals. What workers would receive, aside from economic justice, would be enhanced social status. The new image of the worker would be one of honor and pride in his station in life. Workers would no longer constitute an alienated and despised group. They would again take their rightful place in society; their importance and dignity would be recognized by the rest of the nation. In the ideal Nazi Volksgemeinschaft, classes would exist (based upon talent, property, profession, etc.), but there would be no class conflict. Different economic and social classes would live together harmoniously and work for the common good. A national consciousness would replace the class consciousness that had historically divided Germans and turned them against one another.
Although socialism and anticapitalism were significant parts of the Nazi ideology, compromises were made on these aspects before and after the Nazis seized power. Ultimately, many of the socialistic ideals and programs remained unrealized. Part of the reason for this was that within the party there was violent disagreement over the essence of national socialism. Hitler, himself, was more concerned with the racial, nationalistic, and foreign policy goals of the ideology than he was with socialism. While he glorified the workers in his speeches, he later downplayed socialism in his efforts to gain votes from the middle classes and funds from wealthy capitalists. However, the left wing of the Nazi party, lead by Georg and Otto Strasser, considered Nazism essentially a socialistic and anticapitalistic movement. Their goal was the destruction of capitalism and the establishment of a socialist state, and they vigorously protested Hitler's compromises. In most cases, Hitler's views prevailed, but the conflict between these party factions over such issues would last until the suppression of the left wing in 1934. In theory, at least, socialism and anticapitalism remained integral parts of the Nazi ideology, and they continued to play a very important role in Nazi propaganda and election campaigns."
To cite another example, Nyomarkay, Joseph (1967). Charisma and Factionalism in the Nazi Party. U of Minnesota Press. p. 91.:
...no one spoke in stronger socialistic terms in this period than Hitler's protege, Goebbels, who attempted to conquer the proletarian districts of Berlin with his National Socialist message. The socialistic orientation of the party [the NSDAP] from 1925 to 1928 was reflected not only in its propaganda but also in its membership. (...) This decidedly socialistic orientation was, for a variety of mutually reinforcing reasons, reversed by Hitler in 1929.
I don't believe we've covered the shift in Nazi rhetoric towards the right in the years leading up to and including their assumption of power. And I believe the lead should mention that the ideology incorporates "socialistic elements". -- Director ( talk) 12:24, 16 November 2013 (UTC)
According to everything I have studied about Germany and Russia prior to WW2, their political philosophies were almost identical. Both were deeply entrenched in Socialist theory with different approaches to implement it. Germany leaned toward nationalizing all private business allowing owners to keep their business but all major decisions were made by the central government. Russia moved toward taking over the business sector entirely. How does this article and it author or authors equate that with "right / conservative" ideology? What does this mean to citizens of the U.S. and the nationalizing of healthcare? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mreven ( talk • contribs) 02:48, 23 November 2013 (UTC)
Actually, from what I've studied it makes very little sense to put Nazism on the far right. Their economic policy (years before the war, I might add) was much more aligned with the Soviet economic policy as opposed to the west's, minus the equality aspects of course. Chris Mann and Matthew Hughes have pointed out that by 1936 the central government in Berlin could tell big business what it had to produce and it what quantities - with profits, production levels and future plant construction all set centrally. Hardly right wing! I don't think there's any point labeling Nazism as far left (even if it might look it) since most mainstream sources will contradict it, but equating Nazi economic policy with capitalism instead of central planning is just plain laughable. Fartnut ( talk) 12:08, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
This edit reintroduces phrasing I had only just copyedited. Putting awful English back in such as "To increase its appeal to the larger segments of the population" and "a unification of all Germans united in a Greater Germany" is not beneficial to the article. As for the order of the name change and Hitler's becoming leader of the party and more or less taking it over, there may be a point there, but I am not sure there are exact dates for either of those – the original wording simply said both had happened "by the early 1920s", without saying which came first, which seems detailed enough for the lead and certainly not inaccurate. I'm not sure there was a problem that needed fixing there, even if it could be done in better English. N-HH talk/ edits 19:15, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
The DAP was changed to the NSDAP before Hitler assumed leadership or party chairman of the party so it should be said before the mention of Hitler becoming the leader. Also, a (DAP) beside the German Workers Party would also be beneficial.-- Windows66 ( talk) 19:26, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
I acknowledge the edit regarding unification of Germans/Germany, but the point still remains that the name was changed before Hitler became the leader of it, the current version is giving readers the impression that it was changed after he became the leader which was not the case. A simple putting the change name before Hitler's leadership would be beneficial.-- Windows66 ( talk) 15:22, 2 December 2013 (UTC)
What evidence is there that he initially disproved of the name change? Everywhere I have read states he wanted the name changed and approved of it greatly.-- Windows66 ( talk) 09:53, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
Nazism, or National Socialism in full (German: Nationalsozialismus), is the ideology and practice associated with the 20th-century German Nazi Party and state as well as other related far-right groups.
Linking NAZI to the far-right is historically and intellectually dishonest. I can understand the modern conventions trying to make such links but I expect more from this site. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.24.32.227 ( talk) 15:39, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
Seems this whole section has be subverted to the anti-socialist agenda to tie it to Nazism. When in fact Nazi Germany was never simple either or system.
LynnMcA ( talk) 10:13, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
"By the early 1920s, Adolf Hitler had become its leader and assumed control of the organisation, now renamed the National Socialist German Workers’ Party in a bid to broaden its appeal." - Adolf Hitler is linked there.-- Windows66 ( talk) 12:25, 7 January 2014 (UTC)